haops_get_discussion

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions retrieving information but lacks details on idempotency, permissions, rate limits, or side effects. The description is minimal and relies on the agent inferring that it is a read-only operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. It is concise and avoids unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly expanded to include more context without sacrificing conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema is provided, so the description should explain what is returned. It mentions 'detailed information, including metadata and entity linkage', but this is somewhat vague. For a simple retrieval tool, this may be adequate, but it could be more specific about the structure of the response.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the parameters are fully described in the schema. The description does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., 'projectSlug' and 'discussionId' are not elaborated further). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Get detailed information'), the resource ('a specific discussion thread'), and specifies what is included ('metadata and entity linkage'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like haops_list_discussions (list) and haops_search_discussion (search).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage when a user needs details about a specific discussion, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like haops_list_discussions or haops_search_discussion. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.